Using a throwaway account to keep things private Last year I was "sex-torted" on Facebook but not by a ring of French criminals. Instead, it was by someone I had chatted with on the internet years ago (while we were both still teenagers) She had recently gotten divorced and contacted me after many years away. We spoke about intimate things (I never shared intimate images, though she did) and were getting closer and c…
Another example of how everything you post online or send in an email is there forever and can come back to haunt you. I'm sorry for your experience but hope others can learn from this.
I think the saddest part of this is that they prey on people. Many of the peeps here on HN can look at a profile and say "spam," so it's hard to imagine the people who can't. The 1% return from SPAM that click on those links, or put in their credit card details. There was a ReplyAll podcast episode where one of the reporters actually tracks down a shop in India; even goes there and talks to people who've worked at a…
I've reported spam accounts to Facebook - in fact I do so whenever I come across one. And on more than one occasion Facebook have closed the ticket claiming the account was legitimate. If some of Facebook's own moderation team cannot differentiate between spam accounts and legitimate ones then what hope is there for others?
I think the saddest part of this is that they prey on people. Many of the peeps here on HN can look at a profile and say "spam," so it's hard to imagine the people who can't. The 1% return from SPAM that click on those links, or put in their credit card details. There was a ReplyAll podcast episode where one of the reporters actually tracks down a shop in India; even goes there and talks to people who've worked at a…
I've reported spam accounts to Facebook - in fact I do so whenever I come across one. And on more than one occasion Facebook have closed the ticket claiming the account was legitimate. If some of Facebook's own moderation team cannot differentiate between spam accounts and legitimate ones then what hope is there for others?
Facebook's moderation team faces far different incentives and consequences than you when checking if an account is spam. Which is worse - a false positive, or a false negative?
Facebook would rather leave 999 false profiles up and not accidentally close 1 genuine profile that just happens to look spammy. From their perspective, ruining someone's Facebook experience by deleting their account is worse than letting everyone else have a slightly worse experience (after all, even those fake profiles are generating ad revenue).
In contrast, Youtube is flagging, demonetizing, and three-striking channels left and right, using much more trigger-happy moderation (and even auto-mods) to control videos. They have plenty of content creators, but need to keep both viewers and lawyers happy.
Be careful that you know where you stand on these platforms, especially on important things like Amazon AWS accounts.
I find it unbelievable that Facebook doesn't have the fake profile situation under control. Facebook builds an incredibly detailed social graph of every user (and non-user) with a big trail of activity, on and off Facebook. Surely there are signs; surely there are common characteristics, and if this journalist can write such a detailed exposé with only public data, Facebook can do much better.
Why would they scuttle their own engagement metrics by pruning out highly-engaged segments of the social network, though?
Using a throwaway account to keep things private Last year I was "sex-torted" on Facebook but not by a ring of French criminals. Instead, it was by someone I had chatted with on the internet years ago (while we were both still teenagers) She had recently gotten divorced and contacted me after many years away. We spoke about intimate things (I never shared intimate images, though she did) and were getting closer and c…
Another example of how everything you post online or send in an email is there forever and can come back to haunt you. I'm sorry for your experience but hope others can learn from this.
But more importantly fuck people who kink-shame.
It's just sex, and people into kink tend to have better sense of consent and mutuality.
I've reported spam accounts to Facebook - in fact I do so whenever I come across one. And on more than one occasion Facebook have closed the ticket claiming the account was legitimate. If some of Facebook's own moderation team cannot differentiate between spam accounts and legitimate ones then what hope is there for others?
Facebook's moderation team faces far different incentives and consequences than you when checking if an account is spam. Which is worse - a false positive, or a false negative? Facebook would rather leave 999 false profiles up and not accidentally close 1 genuine profile that just happens to look spammy. From their perspective, ruining someone's Facebook experience by deleting their account is worse than letting ever…
I am sure I will sound naive to you but what do you mean by AWS accounts here?
This... was an unreadable experience. Gratuitous animations, football field sized paragraph widths, proportional/fluid CSS sizing (thought maximizing my browser on a 1080p screen would allow me to see more), bite sized paragraphs interspersed with information-thin graphic inserts, full width graphics that have a larger height than your browser viewport, text swooshing down the screen while you're scrolling because th…
yes too much work for a rather simple issue. Somewhere in the way i was so annoyed i stopped reading.
1. I got told many years ago, that when you get that crazily bad emails, where it claims to be from some official source, but there are spelling mistakes, the return email address is obviously wrong, grammer is terrible, etc. the sort where it is so completely obviously it is a scam - often this is done on purpose, they aren't intereseting >99% of people who can spot a scam, they are interested in the 2. Separately to the above, a reasonable amount of men (perhaps women to? I don't know, I feel like it is more men) will happily look at girls, whether this in a Playboy Magazine in the 50's, looking at girls as the enter a bar in the 90's or whether it is flicking through images of a girl on Facebook/Instagram in the 21st century. Some of these men actually know it is a scam, but don't really care, at the end of the day it's a picture of an attractive girl/woman, they so they look through. Maybe they even add that profile as a friend, as they don't mind having the pictures appearing naturally in their news feed. I don't know whether many (any?) of this group of people end up getting scammed. Perhaps somehow overtime, they get convinced the account isn't fake, or perhaps they still think it is fake but agree to go onto a video chat and then are convinced on there, or perhaps they are trying to catch the scammer out, but end up being caught out themselves.
This... was an unreadable experience. Gratuitous animations, football field sized paragraph widths, proportional/fluid CSS sizing (thought maximizing my browser on a 1080p screen would allow me to see more), bite sized paragraphs interspersed with information-thin graphic inserts, full width graphics that have a larger height than your browser viewport, text swooshing down the screen while you're scrolling because th…
I agree. It was pretty annoying. So are the new top/bottom footers on Medium. I sometimes open up the inspector and delete those two divs just to read the page, but most of the time I don't bother, give up on the article, and just close the tab. Content should just be content. You shouldn't need Javascript to simply view a page. Even if this was all just CSS tricks, it's still pretty annoying. I mean it's a neat idea…
Why not just use reader mode? It worked fine for me for this article.